Legal Opinion

Fulmer v. Insura Property & Casualty Co.

Ohio Supreme Court

Decided January 16, 2002No. 00-1788PublishedCited by 21 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtDouglas, J.

Plaintiff-appellant, Catherine Fulmer, was injured when her automobile was struck by an automobile driven by Albert Kulics. Kulics’s negligence caused the collision. At the time of the accident, Kulics, the tortfeasor, was insured under a policy of automobile insurance with liability coverage limits of $50,000 per person. Fulmer was insured under a policy of automobile insurance issued by defendant-appellee, Insura Property & Casualty Insurance Company, that provided underinsured motorist coverage with a limit of $100,000 per person.

As is generally true of insurance contracts that provide…

2Cases cited4 opinions

  1. Bogan v. Progressive Casualty InsuranceOhio Supreme Court · 1988
  2. McDonald v. Republic-Franklin InsuranceOhio Supreme Court · 1989
  3. Stahl v. State Farm Mutual Automobile InsuranceOhio Court of Appeals · 1992
  4. Combs v. Nationwide Mutual InsuranceOhio Court of Appeals · 1997

3Cited by21 opinions

  1. State v. Harper (Slip Opinion)Ohio Supreme Court · 2020
  2. Bonacorsi v. Wheeling & Lake Erie Ry. Co.Ohio Supreme Court · 2002
  3. Ferrando v. Auto-Owners Mutual InsuranceOhio Supreme Court · 2002
  4. State v. Howard (Slip Opinion)Ohio Supreme Court · 2020
  5. State v. Harper (Slip Opinion)Ohio Supreme Court · 2020

16 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API